Do you think that C&C RA1s AI totally beats the new gene

[Azrael 0]

Do you think that C&C RA1s AI totally beats the new generals AI?

[Malebranche 0]

I haven't played Generals yet, but based on my experiences with RA1 AI and what I've heard about Gen AI, I think it doesn't. I remeber the only thing RA1 AI would do was create lots of soldiers and send to you by the same way. It wouldn't ever build airplanes and ships. Gen AI probably can do better.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Who cares about strategy? C&C is just loads of soldiers so the RA1 AI performs quite well.

[Luk3us 63]

this is real simple..

 

General = Ai

 

RA = Scripts.

 

Simple

[Nyerguds 102]

That's wrong. The missions are indeed scripted, but if you fight against a Hard AI in RA1 Skirmish, be sure you'll see some really good strategy.

[Luk3us 63]

You call building lots of tanks and then sending them at the enemy is great stragey?!

[Gazdude 0]

Naa, he means defensive strategy...

[Koen 2]

RA1 AI was totally cool... it would just pump out units and tanks if it had money, while the Generals AI will just save up money and don't use it.

[Luk3us 63]

Yeah and most of the AIs around cheat. Utterwise they'd get their ass kicked.

[Gazdude 0]

I think the TS AI was the one that cheated the most...

[BigPoppaBear 0]

I've never really though of AI having strategy. They always seem to periodically tank rush. If you've looked at an RA1 ini file, the default setting is to attack 10 minutes into the skirmish, and then every five minutes therafter. They would use helicopters, but never Yaks, MiGs, or any naval unit. They're base would consist of CY, 1 barracks, 1 WF, 1 Radar, 6 or 7 Refineries, 4 or 5 helipads, and seemingly enough power to somehow keep it all running. In RA1 skirmishes, Sub Pens/NYs, Tech Centres, Chronospheres, A-Bomb Silos, and Airfields were never built. At least, not by the AI.

 

RA2 was an improvement, Medium/Brutal Soviets will use Subs, but for the most part they would rely on 1 or 3 kirovs to kill you, if their Engineer rush at the start failed.

I can't remember TS much, but I don't rmeember being impresed.

[Malebranche 0]

TS AI was the best for me. They could hold a base very well and they would even use the sub-apc eng rush. But RA2 AI is good too.

[sorce 0]

I think the AI's get increasingly harder with every game, and I still cannot defeat the hard ai on zero hour. Especially the GLA, it destroys me before i even have a chance to get my weap. factory up

[TheBlackOut 7]

ZH's AI is simple to beat, either rush them with troops, build defences, or tanks and troops to use as defence wall. And OMG YES! RA1 did own with their AI, even if no strategey that can blow you to hell if you do hard! Real fast and real big forces come at you, you got to love it! I wish they try that again.....

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Here's my breakdown of it:

 

TD-No skirmish mode :cry:

 

RA-Tanked and infantry rush with a few helicopters. No concentrated assault. No navy. No massive airstrikes. No superweapons. Multiple defenses

 

TS-Vehicles and Infantry all over creation. Used everything in the tech tree. Had superweapons before you had Tech center. Cheated a lot. Not too difficult to beat, but it takes forever. Have also seen the sub APC enginer rush tactic used

 

RA2-Too easy. One big attack at the beginning. Screwed up tech tree. Fast superweapons. Used all basic naval units. No massive groud/air/naval strike. No overall strategy

 

Generals-Air craft used. Tanks and infantry used. Superweapons used, but sparringly. Attack groups too small, even on hard and brutal. Cheated with building speed.

[Inferno 22]

Every c&c AI cheated in buildspeed as far as I know. Also keep in mind that AI's build their buildings instantly, they don't have to place it. And what has been really weak of the AI, if you destroyed their building, place a tank on a spot where the building used to be, he won't build the building again.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Cause he always reebuilds it in the same spot.

 

They better have a decent AI in RA3.

[Inferno 22]

Yup. It simply would be best if it's an AI, which hardly cheats but just has a high AI.

 

And the normal campaign agianst the AI, including movies and stuff, but then like the world domination mode. That you can actually lose territory.

[sonofabandit 0]

I would rather have an actual A.I. rather than scripts. Heck, if EA can make effective oponents for Madden 2005 why not C&C? (Cause' C&C is not a top project at EA could be one explaination)

[BWare 0]

You have to be kidding me! RA1 vs Generals?? It isn't even close!! Generals, while I do despise it on some levels, has excellent AI.... ACTUAL AI. RA1's AI was garbage. Don't you remember the headaches you got trying to manage your idiot ore trucks?? How about the enemy bases scattered with random flame towers and crowded with columns of tanks just stuck there, barrels twitching irratically? Seriously people... Generals' AI wins hands down.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

And the Generals AI actually uses superweapons.

[Inferno 22]

Like you can call the ones in RA1 superweapons. Hah.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Well, my RA nukes are powerful. But thats my own doing, not Westwood's. The nukes in RA arent worthy of the title Atomic Weapons.

(cant spell nukelear)

[BWare 0]

Well, my RA nukes are powerful. But thats my own doing, not Westwood's. The nukes in RA arent worthy of the title Atomic Weapons.

(cant spell nukelear)

Seriously... WHAT was up with that??

[Cygnus X-1 12]

"Balance"

 

A load of crap, if you ask me.

 

"If you're gona nuke 'em, then for crying out loud, BLAST THE HELL OUT OF THEM ALREADY!!"-Cygnus X-1 (meself)